It might be differences in culture. I live in Sweden so the ultra conservatives are barely existing. I think the difference that make us misunderstand each other is the oposite. Equality has come a long way in Sweden and the macho masculinity is not that much of an ideal anymore. I guess it might be a lot easier to be an unmasquline man in Sweden than in UK perhaps?

Also the discourse of feminism has moved far beyond the "men are better/women are better" quarrel. These opinions were big say 20 years ago. Since then the discourse of feminism (or "gender knowledge", don't know a better translation) has developed to a huge web of analyzes of power structures in society and how they intersect. In this context, people who claim that "all men are pigs" are not seen as feminists but as people upholding the gender differences (if all men are pigs that also means that all women are different and then you have put the responsibility on the women for the mens behavior. The "all men are pigs" is usually followed by "so you should have known better than following a guy home" or something like that.

The word "feminism" has been kept to acqnowledge that feminists se the problem of structural opression against women and want to do something about it. Also out of respect of the feminist movement and its earlier achievements. It has nothing to do with hating men, just like this place is not about hating women even though the place is exclusive for men. From your writings I guess that the development of the feminist movement is different in the UK

In Sweden you just can't say "men are pigs" and stuff out in the media. It's terribly politically incorrect. There was a woman who did this many years ago and people still write about it. Even though the quote was taken out of context. (She answered the question of what she thought a woman would think of men, who had been battered by one most her life. Then the question was cut).

So I guess I am failing to fully understand your perspective, making the mistake of thinking that your reality is the same as mine. In Sweden the people who dislike feminists are usually old men stating that men should be men and women should be women... and then there are a few men who think that white men are the opressed group in society and everytime someone says anything about racism or sexism they start shouting something unfair that they experienced. Usually they bring up the "men are pigs"-lady described above. Like nobody else has ever been insulted by anyone.

I just don't understand why the struggle for more acceptance for men that break the norm of masculinity must be in competition with other groups.

Oh, and to get back on topic, the point I was trying to make in my first post was that DESPITE all this progress in the gender equality area, where men taking care of children are widely applauded as are women doing traditionally manly stuff, it still seems completely incomprehensible to the public that women can be perpetrators of sexual abuse. That's what bugs me. After all this development towards equality, the notion that women can't commit sexual crimes is still so accepted. I don't understand why. It causes damage to victims of female abuse, both sexes, and it sure makes it more difficult to reach the abusive women with treatment.

@blessedcurse, yes indeed, i believe in Britain the recognition that it is possible to be sexist towards a man is not half as complete as it is in Sweedan, for instance it would still! be fine over here to claime "all men are pigs" or a similar statement in public. Such statements are not made by victims either, but by women who are often close to being down right paranoid, and will become extremely aggressive at the slightest provocation.

For example, it's not uncommon in certain British institutions for a man to be shouted at and possible even diciplined for holding the door open for a woman on the basis of being sexist, even if the man would do the same thing for another man, ---- and I've mentioned on this forum before my so called "introductory lecture" to s/xual ethics which began with the words "seventy percent of men would rape a woman if they could"

Still worse over here, all men are becoming demonized as pedofiles whatever the circumstances, and male teachers or indeed any man who interacts with children at all has to be dam careful to literally never touch them. For instance, a friend of mine who worked as a classroom assistant in a nursery school (who actually now has a daughter of his own), said that he physically had to pull a little girl off him who was attempting to give him a hug or risk getting fired.

this isn't to say there aren't! dodgy men around, plenty of guys of this site can attest to it, but believing all! men are in some way potential abusers to the extent where you literally refuse to let a man even look at a child is just ridiculous.

Then there is a considderable amount of media, in which violence towards men is seen as fine, but not towards women, --- indeed violence or still worse s/xual humour towards men is often treated as a joke where as it wouldn't be towards women.

It often strikes me that, while there are! women who strive for actual equality, we're at a stage now where all the Victorian ideals of "protecting women" are still in force, but the victorian view of women as "weaker" is not.

Indeed, it's my own belief that traditional gender sterriotypes also promote the idea that men are expendable and that harm done to men doesn't count, as much as they promote the idea of female pacivity and helplessness, ---- after all, it's perfectly alright for the knight to be hurt or even killed while fighting the dragon, --- but it would be terrible if the princess died!

Look at the prince in the story of rapunzel as a primery example, ---- rapunzel herself is indeed just as pacive and useless a character as most people suggest, ---- but who is the one who gets blinded?

As I said, I fully agree that the "x is better" is a ridiculous debate, howeverr in Britain, the idea that a man could! be the victim of sexism is pretty much unknown, and "Feminism" usually too often means purely promoting the interests of women and denirating those of men, ---- especially in political or professional circles, which is why I emphasize the idea of sexism against men, even though i would be just as offended at a person who had a similarly sexist attitude to women.

The mainstream of the feminist movement in Sweden would strongly argue against the view of men as expendable, since this suggests a difference between men an women that means people need to change themselves to fit into a norm. It is just two sides of the same problem. As long as we see men as expendable warriors the view of women as precious and passive comes along.

For example, recently a female prison guard was killed by an inmate. Emmediately some old anti feminist went out in the media stating that her death was the fault of feminism because this is was happens when a woman does a mans work. The people arguing against it are the feminists, saying that this way of thinking suggests that a man would have been able to defend himself or that a man killed would have been less of a disaster, wich is an old fasioned view of men as strong, violent and expendable.

Men in child care are not seen as you describe. Public policy is that children need role models of both sexes and men are also encouraged to stay at home with their own children. Despite this, men do not use the possibility of paternity leave in any large extent and are very few in child care. This makes the consequenses that, to get child care staff of both sexes, men are privileged in that they often get a job before women with better references and also get paid more to stay. The same thing does not happen for women in sectors dominated by men, on the contrary, they usually are paid less and not promoted.

As to female offenders, a study in Sweden showed that the convicted offenders of csa were 80 % male. This means 20 % were female wich raised a discussion of why the perpetrator is almost allways portrayed as a man. I mean, of cours 80% is a majority but there are still many female perpetrators out there. Also there was a study suggesting that though men commit the vast majority of all violent crimes, those areas where the most female offenders were, were in crimes against children. Explained simply that women have the physical posibility to abuse children in a larger extent than adults and also that it comes with the female stereotype to be alone with children, being ther primary attachment object and thus having great oportunities to get away with ca/csa.

The view that all men are pedophiles and can not be around children is only hurting the feminist movement. I mean, come on, if men cannot take care of children than who will be left to do it all. The taking care of children argument is one of the biggest that keep women from gaining power in different areas, in that they cannot really be trusted as employees since they have maternity leave, stay at home when children are sick, are expected to allways put familly first and so on. Men taking their share of that responsibility would mean a lot for the feminist movement.

What annoys me a bit is that in Sweden, having come so far, the people promoting a more equal view of both men and women are usually female feminists. Where are the men in this? Why don't men go out and "rage" in the media when some old guy sais only men should be prison guards since they can take it? It's allways the female feminists and occationally some young guy. Why are men leaving the equality movement all to the women, even tho men also are badly affected by the stereotype?

Like this with female offenders. Why don't men go out in the media trying to nuance the immage of offenders of both genders? Instead the female feminists do as a part of the struggle to see that both men and women have masculine and feminine traits. Instead most men who argue openly are either the "men should be men and everything bad is because of feminism" people, or people saying that it is really the men that are the victims of womens power.

Why can't we just work together against a system that mutilates both sexes? Why can't we just wait a minute and analyze our privileges respectively, aqnowledge them and then make an effort together to dismantle the whole gender based system?

I read the article linked above, it was really interesting. This is much of what feminist movement is about in Sweden. I think you'd like it. Even if the mainstream in your country is stupid you can still raise above it and take the whole thing to another level No reason for the feminist/equality movement to allways be lead by women. Women are not allways right.

Feminist rhetoric is filled to the brim with sexism against men, I've seen many women who trump self-serving feminist philosophy in one breath, and in the next humiliate and insult men for not being "masculine" enough, having small penises, caring about their looks, not being capable of physical labor, etc. Several of the female abusers in my family were like this. Meanwhile, I do see that males are, from birth, oppressed and put into boxes. Of course women always think their problems are the most important, and wish to filter history and modern life to the extent that they are never responsible for what they do, because it can all be blamed on 'men' instead.

But feminism has not brought progress to helping people break out of male gender roles, in fact most often I see feminists taking the opposite bent--wanting to oppress men into their conception of a highly conservative, traditional masculinity while supporting the liberation of women.

Meanwhile boys growing up are subjected to an epidemic of unreported, unconvicted child abuse, sexual, physical, and emotional. When you consider that all perpetrators were once abused themselves, the statistics of male childhood victims explodes to a much higher number then females. It is sad that people are interested in explanations when it comes to female perpetrators, but if they're male, no analysis whatsoever is sought except to say that they are just "disgusting men." Violence comes from violence, it doesn't come from 'male hormones' like many feminists say, so if adult males are more violent, it's because they were given much rougher treatment as children, and all adults, male and female, are responsible for that and for changing it.

Blessedcurse mentions female prison guards, but not the fact that in his country there was a military draft of MALES ONLY right up until 2010, where males were forced to pick up guns and oppressed by the conditions of boot camp and a military hierarchy simply for being born with a penis, while females were spared this. How many women were out there protesting THIS as opposed to focusing on their own issues?

I'm sure that many boys growing up being abused by their mothers and other female adults will never come around to feminism or agreeing with women that they are always the greater victims and always the ones with the most important issues. Perhaps that should be respected, and more women should come to see that males are historically and currently oppressed as well.

Well blessedcurse, while from what you said the situation in sweedan doesn't sound perfect, it does sound a lot further along than in this country. Here, i think the sterriotypical, ---- even if not accurate, view of prime minister margaret thatcher has become rather too much part of the view of a female ideal, an aggressive, politically motivated, emotionless woman who stomps all over anyone in her way to get what she wants especially if that person is a man, and justifies such bullying and unpleasant tactics by the view that women are oppressed by men who crush their gentle spirits.

for example, it's quite ironic that people like Amy whitehouse will push for "a ban of male centric tv violence" by using hate filled and angry slogans, then in the same breath promote romances, family dramas and other media that shows very sterriotypical view of women and indeed is aimed at women as ""A promotion of family values" whatever the heck that means.

on the work and economics issue, that is another debate, and I will fully agree there that in most positions in corporations, women do! receive a less fair deal than men, sinse it is still believed even when a man is single that he must be a provider for a housewife and children at some point in his life, even if his wife is the one who works.

yet, by the same tocan, while many female advocates are protesting such injustices, nobody mentions for instance the case of male victims of abuse who lose their jobs, or the fact that men are still far more likely than women to be arrested for offenses such as drunkenness or disordily behaviour, even though women are just as guilty.

Myself, I'd rather devorce characteristics from gender altogether. A very close friend of mine is a girl who is competative, physically active, protective and physically aggressive in appropriate ways, (she's a black belt in karate and a very able fencer, indeed she does viking reinactment as a hobby and is an expert with a broard sword).

She also admits herself that her first boyfriend was primarily physically motivated, heck she even walks and moves in a pretty none female way, tending to sprawl all over the place, be physically extremely affectionate to friends, and she doesn't particularly give a dam about her appearence, to the extent where once in colidge she wandered into the dining room in a dressing gown and was quite casual about it.

The fact that I love her like a brother, and she's also extremely compassionate (well to people she believes deserve compassion), however, is the most important thing about her, indeed she's one of the few people I've told about my abuse, and because of her completely unqiue view of gender, she absolutely believed me.

This is actually the sort of ideal I mean for gender equality, where traits such as physicality, competitiveness (which doesn't have to be negative), sensory appreciation, care for appearence etc, are seens imply as preferences.

yet at the same time, I run and lift weights, and while I am none competative with others, do appreciate challenging myself (one reason I enjoy things like skeeing and rock climbing, but not games like football).

As you've noticed, I also am extremely verbal, (a traditionally female traite in western society), yet I also appreciate logical discourse and arguement.

i'm not saying I get the gender thing right all the time, only that i do try to behave more like "me" and less like the sterriotypical man, which is something I really wish more people in society tried to do, ---- but as vadrean said, where as it's becoming increasingly easy for women it's becoming harder and harder for men, at least in Britain and probably the states too, ---- over here the death of a female prison guard would raise far more stink, but not because she was "doing man's work" simply because for a young woman to die is a tragedy, where as had she been male I doubt it'd even made the news.

Vadrian: Yes, the military draft is unbelievable. It is just as you said. They changed it only a few years ago and I suspect there are economic reasons behind more then gender equality. Now noone is forced and anyone can apply. As for the feminist movements take on this, they were divided in to sides. One side advocated military draft compulsory to both sexes, the other that the compulsory military draft was abolished. Nobody with any kind of feminist values wanted the male only draft so I find it really hard to understand why it lasted so long.

Well, older generations I guess. The military service has this role in the swedish male mind of making boys into men. All men age 40+ share the stories of the time in the military. After that generation it wasn't for everybody, the military just chose the ones they wanted. I think the military for all men has done a lot of damage when it comes to masculinity and male identity. I didn't do it myself but from what I've heard all they do is learn to be tough, call each other efeminite names when they fail and glorify violence.

We seem to have a lot in common. I too am allways most drawn to the androgyn people of both sexes and I have allways felt I don't really fit into the male or female stereotype. To me the people who have a bit of both usually come through as more real and honest, as opposed to people having spent their whole lifes trying to fit into one role or the other. I just wish everyone could be as they were.

Oh, and I totally agree about the romantic dramas and family tv-shows. There is nothing as gender-recreating as a romantic comedy. I espescially hates the ones where the father of the family is paying all bills while being ugly and stupid, and the wife is spending all money on beautystuff. The gender-recreation in those is also more dangerous I think, than in the war movies, because you don't emmediately notice it if you don't have some training or are really pissed of by equality. They promote some ideals really strongly and also reflect the equality already at hand. Why is a married man trying to get away from his wife so incredibly funny?

I
agree that my access and use of the MaleSurvivor discussion forums and
chat room is subject to the terms of this Agreement. AND the sole
discretion of MaleSurvivor. I agree that my use of MaleSurvivor
resources are AT-WILL,
and that my posting privileges may be terminated at any time, and for
any reason by MaleSurvivor.